Policy makers have been urged to consider concerns raised by the European Court of Auditors. The concerns were raised over proposed changes to the CAP which would be too complex as well as too difficult for paying agencies and for farmers to administer, the NFU said.
The Court makes a comprehensive assessment of many aspects of the Commission’s proposals including cross-compliance, greening, active farmers, first activation of payment entitlements, payments for areas with natural constraint, small farmers and capping.
NFU President Peter Kendall said the Court’s report reiterated many of the concerns the NFU has held since the CAP reform process began.
’The Court criticises the European Commission for the complexity of its reform proposals, going so far as to say that it doubts whether the some of the proposals can be implemented effectively without excessive burden on farmers,’ he added.
’The Court urges the Commission to go back to basics and consider the objectives of the CAP as laid out in the Treaty, which is ’to increase agricultural productivity as well as increasing the individual earnings of persons engaged in agriculture’. These are wise words at a time when the need to increase food production is widely recognised.
’Now is not the time for setting aside land from production, or increasing the costs and bureaucracy associated with CAP. The final shape of the next CAP will be determined jointly by the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers.
I urge all the decision makers involved to take heed of the Court’s recommendations and particularly consider how the next CAP can be implemented in a way in which we can move forward to a place where farmers’ reliance on public support payments can be reduced.’
The Court’s report also recommends other areas for simplification such as cross compliance and penalties. It also states that the objectives of ’greening’ are not adequately laid down, the ’active farmer’ test will do little - if anything - to ensure that payments go to those exercising an agricultural activity, that there is confusion around the requirement to have activated entitlements in 2011 and highlights the overlap between different support schemes in different parts of the CAP.
